EUCKMAN V. EUCKMAK. 587 �Maegabet Euckman, by her next friend, etc., v. Edckmak �and others. �{Circuit Court, D. Neio Jersey. April 6, 1880.) �Kbmovai. op Cause — Act of Maech 3, 1875 — Unnbcessabt Patîtt.— In a suit in equity to determine the ownersliip of a bond and mortgage, the mortgagor is not, under the circumstances of the case in controversy, a necessary party defendant, and, tlierefore, the suit may be removed, under the act of March 3, 1875, where ail the other defendants join in the petition for removal. �Samb — Geound of Removal — PETirroN. — A cause may be removed un- der the act of March 3, 1875, where the whole record discloses a case over which the court has jurisdiction, although the ground of removal be erroneously alleged in the petition. �Motion to Eemand. �Robert Allen, Jr., for petitioner. �Jacob Weart, for complainant. �Nixon, J. The suit is brought by Margaret Euckman, wife of one Blisha Euckman, a citizen of the state of New York, by her next friend, Samuel M. Hopping, a citizen of the state of New Jersey, against Elisha Euckman, a citizen of the state of New York, and John F. Boylan and James H. Marley, cit- izens of the state of New Jersey. �The case differa from the suit by the same complainant against the Palisade Land Company and others,* which J have just considered, from the fact that one of the defendants, (Boylan,) who petitions for the removal, is a citizen of a dif- ferent state from that of the complainant, and seems to be "actually iuterested" in a controversy which is wholly between him and her, and which can be "fuUy determined as between them." �The bill sets up, in substance, that the complainant is the wife of the defendant Euckman, now living in a state of sep- aration from him ; that be was a man of large wealth, and began in the year 1877 to make settlements of bis estais upon her by placing loans in her name, and having bonds and mortgages made to her, and having other bonds and mort- gages assigned to her to hold rs her coparate estate; that in �•Ante, 367. ��� �
